Redstate

these people are coming out of the wood works today.
Time to start swinging.

They seem to think coming here and making fools of themselves will ease their pain about the horrible nature of their candidates. Thankfully the best the libs can come up with is making objects of ridicule of themselves. Now a conservative would just look around and see if they could do something to improve things. If the libs ever started being proactive and forward looking well they would be briefly dangerous. Briefly, because as they started to realize they are responsible for their fates, they would become conservatives.

...or maybe their psychiatrist. Posting the same irrational screed on multiple threads under multiple names - maybe a multiple personality disorder?

And Rightly So!

Mwahahahaha!

Wait.

It already has.

n/t

With a handle like that and your views on the WOT, you're a dead ringer for quite a number of our esteemed Democratic congressional representatives (as well as a few with Rs next to their names).

And Rightly So!

...in the Cornyn thread, and you stood me up. Use the contact form to make amends.

and there are thousands more willing to do likewise...NOT IN THE CAVES with the old guys-

I honor the loss of the 9/11 victims as much as anyone else...and that includes preventing it from happening again by killing anyone else that wants to try it-BEFORE they can pull it off.

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

a food I grew up thoroughly enjoying, raised in Maryland as I was...

do you really think McPeak's change of heart after 30+ years in the Military, all the way up to Secretary of the Air Force was because he thought he was wrong?

Or because it was expedient for him to do so given his employment status in the Obama campaign?

Cynicism and skepticism are two important criteria for listening to anything from HuffPo OR the Democrats running for President my friend...

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

about his change of heart on Iraq in order to retain his employment in the Obama campaign. If so, how does this make Obama a liar?

Obama has a campaign co-chair who once claimed to support a long war in Iraq but who now claims to support withdrawal and states that Obama was right all along. How does this reflect poorly on Obama?

If people actually believe that the former position of one of Obama's campaign co-chairs better represents Obama's position on Iraq than the one he's been consistently espousing since before the invasion, then perhaps I should be investing in Reynolds.

he knows full well he will not and can not do what he says in his campaign promises that he is going to do in Iraq.

He wontt pull all troops out, he won't do it one or two brigades a month, and he won't remove all American presence in Iraq OR the Middle east at large. He can't-and he knows from his advisers that it would make the ME worse not better.

Barry's lying just like Pelosi and Reid and Clinton...to keep the cash flowing from the far left anti-war code-pinkers and moveon crowd...

if/when they take the oath of office, they'll be telling us we can't (just yet) do what we promised inre: Iraq...but thank you for your vote-have a nice day.

Iustum et tenacem propositi virum non civium ardor prava iubentium, non vultus instantis tyranni mente quatit solida.
-Quintus Horatius Flaccus

But that has nothing to do with the content of your post, which claimed that we know that Barack is lying because one of his co-chairs supports (better: used to support) a long stay in Iraq. It seems you now realize that this is a silly argument and are now trying to make the case that we know Obama is lying because we CAN'T leave Iraq.

If that is the new argument you are making, then we'll have to wait and see, but nothing you've provided in your post provides any evidence for it.

In the run-up to the Iraq War, General McPeak had expressed strong reservations about Rumsfeld's leadership, and about the wisdom of the entire operation.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120128,00.html

Later, General McPeak joined the campaign of Howard Dean for President in 2004. And when that failed, he switched to the Kerry for President campaign. He was one of those generals that Kerry trotted out at the 2004 Democratic convention to support him and oppose the Bush Administration.

Quite a few of our military officers had reservations about the Iraq War operation. But they were ignored; or in the case of General Shinseki, shunted aside.

2) Context is also your friend. I was addressing Obama's position on Iraq, not Afghanistan.

3) Obama has never opposed the war in Afghanistan. He has consistently said that the real war is there. He calls for more troops now because we need them there now.

4) Name-calling is an ineffective debate tactic, and it makes you look stupid. If your aren't, then avoid it. If you are, there's no need to advertise it; we'll find out quickly enough on our own.

A bunch of Obama's supporters have said that after they get the U.S. out of Iraq, their next move is to get us to withdraw from Afghanistan.

Last week, The Nation published a screed, "Progressives for Obama," signed by Tom Hayden, Barbara Ehrenreich and a bunch of similar left-wingers. In it, they said that after Obama wins the White House, they will begin campaigning to stop ALL U.S. military operations everywhere, not just Iraq--and they specifically included Afghanistan.

It's the powerful left-wing of Obama's coalition that I'm worried about. They're not just interested in cashiering Iraq. They also want to abandon Afghanistan and Israel to their own respective fates as well. I read The Nation and The Carpetbagger Report and other left-wing media, so I know that's their plan.

And if they help get Obama elected, they are going to demand payback for their efforts.

Do you really want to judge McCain by Robertson's and Hagee's long-term goals for America?

If the only way you can argue against Obama's various positions is to ignore them and replace them with those of some extremists who happen to support him, then your both being unfair and demonstrating a remarkable lack of imagination. It's not that hard to attack Obama's real positions. There's no need to replace them with strawmen and windmills.